He also said this. Of course, that wasn't fact. And now he is doing what he incorrectly criticize Obama for.
Ha! C'mon, B-Bob... ...that's what the nukes are for... ...I mean, why have'em if we ain't gonna use'em? ...man, these next few years are gonna be some fun...
I think most sane normal people believe being involved directly and informed on our intel is pretty critical, and important for one of the President main job function - responsible for protecting our system of government, the people and act as commander-in-chief. But, who knows. We can get lucky. We just typically prefer to be well prepared, not just lucky.
And you assume someone who attends these meetings is 'informed' and and someone who doesn't isn't. I think thats a stupid assumption. 90% of the meetings i have for my job could of been handled with emails.
Unless your job is national security and protecting the United States of America from violent hostile actors around the world, then it's not really a good comparison, Doc.
It seems like you are making the wildest assumptions here, trying to relate your job to the commander-in-chief's. To what extent will you go to defend Trump? It'd be nice if you drew a line in the sand so that when Trump does inevitably pass it I can use this to expose you.
OP is posting what basically is in the same line as fake news. Here is Trumps FULL quote. If you're going to criticize Trump, do it when it matters. Obama skipped the same meetings that had nothing new to offer.
Let's forget about Bin Laden, the CIA obviously was wrong about that one too right? Post-truth world.
ugh apparently you misunderstood what i said. Trump doesn't need to go to the meetings if he is getting the info another way (i.e. email)..... I was defending Obama and criticizing Trump's tweet you idiot. go read thread. hell i didn't even vote for Trump.
Did you just compare your job to President of the United States? Hey guys, calling in sick today. That international crisis will just have to wait until I'm back in the office. Derp. Better yet, just email me the details and I'll get back to ya. Thanks.
Depend on your job, right? I don't know what you do, but I'm assuming it's not as critical as POTUS, so sorry, your personal example isn't applicable. Just to add, for my job, many things can be handled over emails to some degree. But to get the job done quickly, effectively and to avoid mis-communication, in person or at least voice call is much better than emails. For POTUS job and daily briefing, yes, I do assume that being involved with those briefing is being informed. It's possible I'm wrong there, but I think that's a much better position then assuming that not being involved with those briefings is being informed.
I compared my meetings to the POTUS meetings. This obviously means I am claiming my job is as important as the presidents....... where do you halfwits come up with this ****...... HIllary apparently thought it was ok to get intelligence by email.....
Trump is more concerned with PR and golf than national security. What a dangerous risk for our country.
From the original post: “I get it when I need it,” he said. Published reports this week said Trump gets a briefing a week, far fewer than his immediate two predecessors received and fewer than those being consumed by Vice President-elect Mike Pence. "I'm, like, a smart person," Trump said. "I don't have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years — but eight years. I don't need that." From you "I get it when I need it," Trump said. "These are very good people that are giving me the briefings," he said, but added, "You know, I'm, like, a smart person. I don't have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years ... I don't need that. But I do say, 'If something should change, let us know.'" What is fake? Quoting Trump is fake news? As for context, the article included the main idea that Trump believe he's smart and so doesn't need daily Intel briefing. And here is the full interview related to this: WALLACE: I just want to ask you about your skepticism about the intelligence community. You are getting the presidential daily brief — TRUMP: Yes. WALLACE: — only once a week. TRUMP: Well, I get it when I need it. WALLACE: But is there some skepticism? TRUMP: First of all, these are very good people that are giving me the briefings. If something should change from this point, immediately call me. I’m available on one minute’s notice. I don’t have to be told — you know, I’m, like, a smart person. I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. It could be eight years — but eight years. I don’t need that. But I do say if something should change, let us know. Now, in the meantime, my generals are great, are being briefed. Mike Pence is being briefed, who is, by the way, one of my very good decisions. He’s terrific. And they’re being briefed. And I’m being briefed also. But if they’re going to come in and tell me the exact same thing that they told me, you know, that doesn’t change necessarily. There might be times where it might change. I mean, there will be some very fluid situations. I’ll be there not every day but more than that. But I don’t need to be told, Chris, the same thing every day, every morning, same words. Sir, nothing has changed. Let’s go over it again. I don’t need that. If Obama and his predecessors skipped the "nothing new to offer", that's completely fair point to said this is all BS. I question if that is actually the case and if there is such a thing as "nothing new to offer" in each day Intel briefing. I haven't seen a reporting on these two points. Where is your source that there is "nothing new to offer" and Obama skipped those? BTW, this is why, I said in the fake news thread, it's dangerous to "outs" fake news. If you can't even tell the difference between possibly bias (there is always bias, so might as well said bias) from fake, and you are in the power to deem what's fake... no good.
Because you (or your fake news source) purposely left out meaningful aspects of Trumps statement. The real quote sounds like trump wants to be informed when intelligence changes and be kept up to date. You got duped by bad info. It happens alot on the left. Just learn from it and don't use that source again.
"I don't have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years — but eight years. I don't need that." It doesn't. Maybe we just read it differently. The quote above does imply that he just don't want to be told the same things over and over, because he's smart. The thing you are missing is he's so smart, maybe he doesn't realize "the same thing over and over" isn't the same thing over and over. Similar to how he has stated he can know everything about nuclear arms in a few hours - because you know, he's just smart. You get the idea? And as I said, if it's indeed true that he's right - that daily briefing is nothing but same thing over and over for days on days (so much so that he reportedly only attend once a week, if even that), then much of this is nothing much to be concern about. Until I see that, I have the feeling that he's just think he's too smart and not realize what he's missing. (btw, is anything you disagree with now consider fake news? jesus christ, help us poor creatures)
No. you are just straight up lying. 'If something should change from this point, immediately call me. I’m available on one minute’s notice.' There is not two ways to take that. He wants to be notified as soon as intelligence changes. He wants to be kept up to date.
And so? You still don't get the point. Maybe you should think a bit about if Intel stays constant for 6/7 days per week.
I think this is much ado about nothing. Sorry, I don't subscribe to the same newsletters as you and I'm not sure I know the right references. On ISIS, I think you're referring to when he called them a JV team to get under their skin? On Russia, I'm not sure what you're referring to -- the campaign jab at Romney??
